Search form

You are here

for example in the cosmolegy section you could find somthing like:the default assumed cosmolegy is the great weel this is the cosmolegy that was also used in many of the older editions of DnD.later in this section you can also find alternatives like the world tree taken from the forgotten realms campaign setting, or the ( forgot it's name) cosmolegy taken from the 4th edition of DnD.

If we're talking player's handbook, then I'd say no. The handbook should be for teaching the current edition of the game. The one exception to that I think should be a quick history of the game near the usual welcome to the edition blurb. New players should have some appreciation for the history of the game, and it might fuel some people's interest in looking into older editions of the game.

If we're talking DMG, then I'd say yes, where it's appropriate. I've always felt it was vital for a DM to be steeped in the game's past as well as its present, if for no other reason than to see how previous editions did things and take some inspiration away from that.

You are being selfish by saying that in order to understand the game, you should have player or being familiar with older editions, this is the worst thing possible, it close the doors to new players...The mentality of if you want to play D&D you should be "initiated" by other players familiar with the game is long gone and it's something that should not return if the brand want to have any hope to survive.

That's my problem with alot of people on this forum, they want to suicide the brand closing it up for new players just do feed their egos.

You are being selfish by saying that in order to understand the game, you should have player or being familiar with older editions, this is the worst thing possible, it close the doors to new players...The mentality of if you want to play D&D you should be "initiated" by other players familiar with the game is long gone and it's something that should not return if the brand want to have any hope to survive.

That's my problem with alot of people on this forum, they want to suicide the brand closing it up for new players just do feed their egos.

You're being selfish to say there shouldn't be so much as an optional section of one book explaining how things tie in with the older editions.

There's a HUGE difference between saying "this domain represents this god from previous editions" and just throwing out the domains with no explanation for previous players. It's just as suicidal for the brand to not provide options for those who are converting to the 5th edition from previous ones, or they just won't do it.

You are being selfish by saying that in order to understand the game, you should have player or being familiar with older editions, this is the worst thing possible, it close the doors to new players...The mentality of if you want to play D&D you should be "initiated" by other players familiar with the game is long gone and it's something that should not return if the brand want to have any hope to survive.

That's my problem with alot of people on this forum, they want to suicide the brand closing it up for new players just do feed their egos.

I think that previous editions should be mentioned, similar to how they were in others. I like how the 4th edition books state that it was built on the backs of earlier ones, and listed the names that built that foundation (Gygax, Arneson, Cook, 3e team, etc.). It's simply respect, in my opinion. A page on the history of the game would be great as well. Why ignore the past?

Just roll some dice.

RADIO FREE BORDERLANDS:

Explore the new D&D podcast that is a celebration of all eras of the game! Discussing the loves, challenges, topics, ideas, and news of this great hobby in both a contemporary and historical view.

You are being selfish by saying that in order to understand the game, you should have player or being familiar with older editions, this is the worst thing possible, it close the doors to new players...The mentality of if you want to play D&D you should be "initiated" by other players familiar with the game is long gone and it's something that should not return if the brand want to have any hope to survive.

That's my problem with alot of people on this forum, they want to suicide the brand closing it up for new players just do feed their egos.

What? How does mentioning previous editions requires players to be familiar with older editions? Or, better still, how does it "close the doors to new players"? How is having some sort of history of the game selfish? What sort of drug-addled "logic" is that? How do you get from Point A to Point B in any rational and honest way?

Maybe as a foreword in the broadest of terms to explain the rich heritage of D&D and leave it at that. Otherwise, the product will need to stand by itself. That does not remove the possibility of explaining more about a specific version of D&D when creating a feel for an adventure, and or when releasing a specific handbook to emulate a play style.

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

Maybe as a foreword in the broadest of terms to explain the rich heritage of D&D and leave it at that. Otherwise, the product will need to stand by itself. That does not remove the possibility of explaining more about a specific version of D&D when creating a feel for an adventure, and or when releasing a specific handbook to emulate a play style.

Pretty much this. I don't think it's really needed unless for a very specific reason. Let the edition stand by itself without trying to intellectually harken back. Especially when new players won't know what the heck the book is talking about and even if it is explained probably won't benefit much from it.